I participated in a panel discussion during Corporate Counsel’s Controlling Legal Costs conference last week. A colleague made the point that slashing costs with no holistic or cohesive plan may well do more harm than good. Carol Ann Petren is Executive Vice President and General Counsel for CIGNA, and she went on to point out that aggressive staffing cuts can increase outside counsel fees and expenses or result in higher liability exposure. I could not agree more. Focusing on cost minimization rather than performance optimization is a recipe for disaster. (Read More)
December 9, 2009
July 15, 2009
The Third Option, Part II
Yesterday I presented the challenge of enforcing all billing guidelines, not just those that the GC feels are being violated. Success here depends on how willing you are to challenge your current bill review procedures. The first step is to define the problem. True, billing guidelines are not being enforced. But why? (Read More)
July 14, 2009
The Third Option, Part I
I’ve worked with corporate law departments that struggled with the decision of whether to drop their high-priced firms in favor of those with lower rates. While this may make sense in the short term, the risk is that if a case goes south, the blame comes straight back to the in-house counsel who brought in the new firm, even if such blame is unwarranted. If you’re in this position, it appears that you only have two choices: stay with the high-priced firms and sacrifice control of your budget; or switch firms and assume this risk (real or perceived).
Enter the third option: (Read More)